That looks like the right article. I understand I may be bias, but as a physician who reads a lot of different clinical studies this does NOT constitute enough evidence for obviousness. It is small (n=50s), ONLY included MEN, did NOT exclusively target >500 Trig (marine label), and patients had a fixed BMI between 25-30. It also had no mention of EPA lowering LDL (one of Vascepa's patents under contention I believe). My interpretation of "obviousness" is can a company submit this study to the FDA and expect them to give approval for that indication and will doctors read the study and feel keen to prescribe the drug for that indication. The answer is a resounding NO on both accounts. There are many studies of other drugs w/ small trials and with the number of patients in 50s that would at most raise an eyebrow and prompt additional larger studies. The reason is results from singular, small, and very focused studies are often contradicted by other small, focused studies. This literally happens all the time. I think in appeal this can easily be shown and demonstrated.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
